May 5, 2024
The Hot Blog
amit on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
Christian on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
YancySkancy on: Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Hcat on: Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: I Should Be Doing Box Office
Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
see all »
[twitter-widget username="DavidPoland" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"][twitter-widget username="MCNTweets" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"]
Quote Unquotesee all »
It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?
So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.
And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.
There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.
I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.
But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”
My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher
“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.
~ David Simon
Now that the Weinsteins will soon be gone, will Miramax clean off their shelves of some of the dozens of movies the company has bought and then sat on?
Jeff: It’s already begun. This week, “Mind Hunters.” Two weeks from now, “Deep Blue.” And that doesn’t begin to take into account all the titles that are going direct to video…. Coming soon to video stores near you, new fewer than TWO new “Hellraiser” sequels.
I own a DVD store in a suburban area, so I think it’s great that all of these small companies are buying up great movies and never distributing them in many theaters. Let Home Entertainment make all the money!
After our 2nd, extremely successful Film Festival, I’ve been trying to get into some theatrical distribution, and it’s amazing how many great movies just aren’t played in theatres here, or anywhere else around the country.
The highly discussed PRIMER – $400,000
The severely underrated CRIMINAL – $900,000
The Oscar nomination worthy performances in The Machinist, and the Woodsman – 1 and 1.5mil.
The “could you load more great actors in this movie” ASSASSINATION OF RICHARD NIXON – $700,000
Even though I know these are the movies that are making me more money, and making my customers excited to come into my store (like Rabbit Proof Fence and City Of God before them), I still feel bad that people haven’t been getting to see them in the theater.
I’m hoping to get a permanent theater togerher here, and I think the least of my worries is finding 52 under-rated films a year.
Nat
cinegeeks.blogspot.com
What I really want to see are some of the many foreign movies that Miramax has never even released on video, stuff from Iran and Japan that are only available on bootlegs in this country because the Weinsteins haven’t seen fit to release them.
The Miramax clean out HAS begun. They’re even released a movie called “Alien Love Triangle” which, I believe, was a three-pronged film but they decided to scrap 2 of them and release just 1 as a full lenght film. It’s name was “Imposter” (if I remember correctly) and stared Gary Sinise.
…?
Aaaanyway.
Nat bought up a movie called “Criminal”. I believe he is talking about the “Nine Queens” remake starring Diego Luna, John C. Reilly and Maggie Gyllenhaal?
This was released here in Australia a few weeks ago and I was shocked firstly that it was even being released because I had not heard one single thing about it until the reviews came out the week it was released and 2 it’s showing in a massive 2 cinemas in Melbourne – Melbourne is Australia’s second largest city and it, i suppose, the New York to Sydney’s LA. I found that really strange considering it does not look like an arthouse movie at all.
Bizarre.
And Nat mentioned Rabbit Proof Fence! Awesome.
I noticed they were putting out alien love triangle…bizarre. Even older is Tsui Hark’s “Zu Warriors” which has been out since 2001. That’s supposed to be coming out.
Criminal is the remake of Nine Queens.
EXACT fucking remake.
They kept it pretty much exactly the same, which works to his benefit, if you haven’t seen the original. Certainly more people in American will see Criminal, which is certainly a plus.
And yes, Rabbit Proof Fence is one of the most successful rentals at my store ever. We hand sold that movie to hundreds of people.
The Times is no ones local paper. Its drivel now.
fuck the times. i read the post
Thats what Miramax does. They buy volume and then sit on most of them and they never see the light of day.
Never trust the NYTimes on this or any story. The NYTimes tailors its content to suit the rich and powerful.
“Garden State” was a hit thanks to New Jersey audiences — Fox put it in mainstream theaters throughout the Garden State. “Open Water” was handled like “The Blair Witch Project” — limited for 2 weeks to get hype/profit, then wide to make more profit.
“Super Size Me” brought in more at the box office than “What the Bleep”. Both had their US release through Roadside Attractions/Samuel Goldwyn Films, part of the IDP combine. (Roadside is currently handling “Ladies in Lavender” with Judi Dench and Maggie Smith.)
Also, ThinkFilm’s biggest release was “Spellbound” — an HBO/Cinemax title that Fine Line didn’t want to distribute.
I just thought I’d mention, Ladies In Lavender is doing really well in Australia. To quote the old line “If you make a movie for over 40s… they will come.”
My House in Umbria also did really well a couple of months ago despite originally being a tv movie that wasn’t particularly good.
If you make a good movie, people will come. People over 40 have some taste too.
ok can we ban the online poker yet?
http://www.rnbmetals.com is importer of various metal scrap,industrial scrap, obsolete scrap that includes aluminum.